SARDAR BHILADWALA PARDI PEOPLE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD THRO MANISH B. DESAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
- Bench
- SANJEEV THAKER
Holding
The court allowed the application and restored the criminal appeal to its original status.
Summary
The applicant filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking restoration of a criminal appeal that had been dismissed by the High Court on 16 January 2026 because no party appeared on the second call and no request for a pass‑over was made. The court had previously dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds. The applicant’s counsel explained the reasons for the non‑appearance, as set out in paragraph 3 of the application. After hearing the counsel, the judge found that the reasons provided were sufficient to justify the absence. Consequently, the application for restoration was allowed. The appeal was restored to its original status.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when a criminal appeal is dismissed for non‑appearance without a pass‑over request?
- Whether sufficient reasons for non‑appearance can justify setting aside the dismissal of a criminal appeal?
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.MA/4246/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR RESTORATION) NO. 4246 of
2026
In R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION/9908/2024
In F/CRIMINAL APPEAL/12016/2024
==========================================================
SARDAR BHILADWALA PARDI PEOPLE CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD THRO
MANISH B. DESAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RUSHABH R SHAH(5314) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
Date : 27/02/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. The present application is filed seeking restoration
of the captioned Criminal Appeal.
2. This Court by an order dated 16.01.2026 had
dismissed the captioned appeal in view of the fact
that none appeared in the second call when the
matter was called out nor any request for passover
was sought.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant stated the
reasons at para nos.3 of the application for not
remaining present.
Page 1 of 2
R/CR.MA/4246/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/02/2026
4. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and
having considered the application, sufficient reasons have
been mentioned in the application for not remaining
present when the matter was called out. In view of the
same, the present application is allowed. The captioned
matter is restored to its original status.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J)
URIL RANA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RANA URIL K(HC01406), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 27/02/2026 16:18:32
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.